FLYBE has cancelled flights from Southend Airport to Cologne after only a week as rival Ryanair announced flights from Stansted.

The airline scrapped flights from Southend to the German city as it feared losing passengers to Ryanair, one of Europe’s largest carriers.

Stobart Air, whose fleet Flybe uses in Southend, is trying to find a replacement or increase capacity on existing routes after claiming it would double the number of passengers using Southend Airport to more than two million in two years.

Cologne, Germany’s fourth largest city, was the best-known of six new routes Flybe announced from Southend on Thursday, April 3, and flights were due to start on June 5.

But the regional carrier jettisoned the route on Thursday after Ryanair revealed it would start 28 flights a week between Cologne and north Essex from October 28.

Refunds will be offered to passengers who bought tickets, which were on sale from £29.99.

The Echo understands Ryanair was planning Cologne flights well before Flybe announced the route, but Flybe’s decision to shelve the new destination was purely down to fears over competition from its rival.

Flybe’s other new flights, to Rennes and Caen in northern France, Munster in Germany, Antwerp in Belgium and Groningen in the Netherlands, are still available.

Stobart Air hoped the new routes would carry 200,000 passengers in their first year, rising to 700,000 in three years and the Echo understands it is considering the possibility of replacing the Cologne route, but no announcement is expected immediately.

The cancellation came as easyJet reduced its number of planes at Southend Airport from four to three, scrapped flights to Krakow, Poland, and stopped winter flights to Jersey and Palma, in Majorca.

A Stobart Air spokesman said: “This decision has been taken for commercial reasons.

“All passengers who have made bookings on this route will be fully refunded.

“We regret any inconvenience this decision may cause.”

A Ryanair spokesman said: “Southend customers can book the lowest fares to Cologne, thanks to Ryanair’s new route from Stansted.”

Derek Jarvis, Southend councillor for culture and tourism, added: “Southend Airport is a continuing success story with more routes than ever.

“Of course it’s disappointing the Cologne route has been cancelled so soon after it was announced, but we have to be positive and consider there will still be five new destinations that residents can fly to.

“It is always a shame when routes are withdrawn such as Krakow, but we understand the airline industry is hugely competitive and must respond to passenger demand.

“The airport is still booming, with easyJet serving 12 destinations and recently announcing more winter flights to Tenerife.”

A wise move to cancel that destination. Maybe Hamburg or Dusseldorf would be more successful?

A wise move to cancel that destination. Maybe Hamburg or Dusseldorf would be more successful?tophat27dt

A wise move to cancel that destination. Maybe Hamburg or Dusseldorf would be more successful?

Score: 12

Southend Andy
9:00am Tue 15 Apr 14

That's a shame, I bet all the antis are rubbing their hands with glee. I can see their comments now 'this is fantastic news the begging of the end for the airport' or 'its death bell the airport'

That's a shame, I bet all the antis are rubbing their hands with glee. I can see their comments now 'this is fantastic news the begging of the end for the airport' or 'its death bell the airport'Southend Andy

That's a shame, I bet all the antis are rubbing their hands with glee. I can see their comments now 'this is fantastic news the begging of the end for the airport' or 'its death bell the airport'

Score: 8

CarnMountification
9:42am Tue 15 Apr 14

For whom the Bell Tolls, starts with a single ring.....

For whom the Bell Tolls, starts with a single ring.....CarnMountification

For whom the Bell Tolls, starts with a single ring.....

Score: -14

Almeda11
10:17am Tue 15 Apr 14

tophat27dt wrote…

A wise move to cancel that destination. Maybe Hamburg or Dusseldorf would be more successful?

Why??

[quote][p][bold]tophat27dt[/bold] wrote:
A wise move to cancel that destination. Maybe Hamburg or Dusseldorf would be more successful?[/p][/quote]Why??Almeda11

tophat27dt wrote…

A wise move to cancel that destination. Maybe Hamburg or Dusseldorf would be more successful?

Why??

Score: 1

whateverhappened
10:18am Tue 15 Apr 14

wonder if no contract with ford had anything to do with it,,

wonder if no contract with ford had anything to do with it,,whateverhappened

wonder if no contract with ford had anything to do with it,,

Score: 5

QuestionTime
10:27am Tue 15 Apr 14

Some of the flight times out of Southend are quite late in the day, in fact passengers don't arrive until mid evening, then by the time you get to your hotel that's the first night/day over and the return flights are early morning/midday which again leaves the passengers with no time at their destination. Even for a long weekend away you really don't get much time at your destination unless you add an extra night which then is more money for your hotel. Maybe Easy Jet and FlyBe could make their flight times more attractive for the weekend traveller and therefore maintain their routes out of Southend.

In the meantime how about Porto as a replacement destination for FlyBe or Easy Jet?

Some of the flight times out of Southend are quite late in the day, in fact passengers don't arrive until mid evening, then by the time you get to your hotel that's the first night/day over and the return flights are early morning/midday which again leaves the passengers with no time at their destination. Even for a long weekend away you really don't get much time at your destination unless you add an extra night which then is more money for your hotel. Maybe Easy Jet and FlyBe could make their flight times more attractive for the weekend traveller and therefore maintain their routes out of Southend.
In the meantime how about Porto as a replacement destination for FlyBe or Easy Jet?QuestionTime

Some of the flight times out of Southend are quite late in the day, in fact passengers don't arrive until mid evening, then by the time you get to your hotel that's the first night/day over and the return flights are early morning/midday which again leaves the passengers with no time at their destination. Even for a long weekend away you really don't get much time at your destination unless you add an extra night which then is more money for your hotel. Maybe Easy Jet and FlyBe could make their flight times more attractive for the weekend traveller and therefore maintain their routes out of Southend.

In the meantime how about Porto as a replacement destination for FlyBe or Easy Jet?

Score: 8

ryhart18
10:35am Tue 15 Apr 14

Let's hope that Ryanair have enough fuel onboard.

Let's hope that Ryanair have enough fuel onboard.ryhart18

Let's hope that Ryanair have enough fuel onboard.

Score: 9

Almeda11
10:44am Tue 15 Apr 14

lt is a ridiculous idea to cancel flights from Southend Airport to Cologne, on the pretext that just because Ryanair now wants to fly there from Stansted that Southend has to withdraw flights !!

lt is not a valid reason at all, and completely illogical.
Ryanair ALREADY has flights from Stansted to Alicante, as has Southend, but Southend has not withdrawn flights to Alicante for the same " reason" has it?

The truth is there is room for both airports to offer these flights, and Stansted is almost a 2 hour journey with the Stansted Express from Southend, so obviously to people living in and around the Southend-on-Sea area, right up to Basildon/Benfleet ect this is by far the easier option, and l feel that Southend Airport is doing a great disservice to the people of Southend.

lt is a ridiculous idea to cancel flights from Southend Airport to Cologne, on the pretext that just because Ryanair now wants to fly there from Stansted that Southend has to withdraw flights !!
lt is not a valid reason at all, and completely illogical.
Ryanair ALREADY has flights from Stansted to Alicante, as has Southend, but Southend has not withdrawn flights to Alicante for the same " reason" has it?
The truth is there is room for both airports to offer these flights, and Stansted is almost a 2 hour journey with the Stansted Express from Southend, so obviously to people living in and around the Southend-on-Sea area, right up to Basildon/Benfleet ect this is by far the easier option, and l feel that Southend Airport is doing a great disservice to the people of Southend.Almeda11

lt is a ridiculous idea to cancel flights from Southend Airport to Cologne, on the pretext that just because Ryanair now wants to fly there from Stansted that Southend has to withdraw flights !!

lt is not a valid reason at all, and completely illogical.
Ryanair ALREADY has flights from Stansted to Alicante, as has Southend, but Southend has not withdrawn flights to Alicante for the same " reason" has it?

The truth is there is room for both airports to offer these flights, and Stansted is almost a 2 hour journey with the Stansted Express from Southend, so obviously to people living in and around the Southend-on-Sea area, right up to Basildon/Benfleet ect this is by far the easier option, and l feel that Southend Airport is doing a great disservice to the people of Southend.

Score: 14

disenfranchisedpast
10:56am Tue 15 Apr 14

Almeda11 wrote…

lt is a ridiculous idea to cancel flights from Southend Airport to Cologne, on the pretext that just because Ryanair now wants to fly there from Stansted that Southend has to withdraw flights !!

lt is not a valid reason at all, and completely illogical.
Ryanair ALREADY has flights from Stansted to Alicante, as has Southend, but Southend has not withdrawn flights to Alicante for the same " reason" has it?

The truth is there is room for both airports to offer these flights, and Stansted is almost a 2 hour journey with the Stansted Express from Southend, so obviously to people living in and around the Southend-on-Sea area, right up to Basildon/Benfleet ect this is by far the easier option, and l feel that Southend Airport is doing a great disservice to the people of Southend.

I would imagine/guess its more because Ryanair have announced they are going to form a fairly substantial base at Cologne rather than just the fact they are flying the same route and flybe doesn't want to go into direct head to head competition for the Germany -Southend passengers, who would naturally gravitate towards the airports "based" operator.

I would assume that ryanair would be able to undercut flybe till they drove them out, operating larger aircraft in the Lo-Co way they do.

Alicante has a wide enough appeal that there is enough people in the Southend area to support it and is run by easyjet who are able to more closely challenge ryanair on terms of price.

It probably makes more sense to withdraw the route now and refocus on something else, rather than fight a losing battle against Ryanair and have the route fail.

[quote][p][bold]Almeda11[/bold] wrote:
lt is a ridiculous idea to cancel flights from Southend Airport to Cologne, on the pretext that just because Ryanair now wants to fly there from Stansted that Southend has to withdraw flights !!
lt is not a valid reason at all, and completely illogical.
Ryanair ALREADY has flights from Stansted to Alicante, as has Southend, but Southend has not withdrawn flights to Alicante for the same " reason" has it?
The truth is there is room for both airports to offer these flights, and Stansted is almost a 2 hour journey with the Stansted Express from Southend, so obviously to people living in and around the Southend-on-Sea area, right up to Basildon/Benfleet ect this is by far the easier option, and l feel that Southend Airport is doing a great disservice to the people of Southend.[/p][/quote]I would imagine/guess its more because Ryanair have announced they are going to form a fairly substantial base at Cologne rather than just the fact they are flying the same route and flybe doesn't want to go into direct head to head competition for the Germany -Southend passengers, who would naturally gravitate towards the airports "based" operator.
I would assume that ryanair would be able to undercut flybe till they drove them out, operating larger aircraft in the Lo-Co way they do.
Alicante has a wide enough appeal that there is enough people in the Southend area to support it and is run by easyjet who are able to more closely challenge ryanair on terms of price.
It probably makes more sense to withdraw the route now and refocus on something else, rather than fight a losing battle against Ryanair and have the route fail.disenfranchisedpast

Almeda11 wrote…

lt is a ridiculous idea to cancel flights from Southend Airport to Cologne, on the pretext that just because Ryanair now wants to fly there from Stansted that Southend has to withdraw flights !!

lt is not a valid reason at all, and completely illogical.
Ryanair ALREADY has flights from Stansted to Alicante, as has Southend, but Southend has not withdrawn flights to Alicante for the same " reason" has it?

The truth is there is room for both airports to offer these flights, and Stansted is almost a 2 hour journey with the Stansted Express from Southend, so obviously to people living in and around the Southend-on-Sea area, right up to Basildon/Benfleet ect this is by far the easier option, and l feel that Southend Airport is doing a great disservice to the people of Southend.

I would imagine/guess its more because Ryanair have announced they are going to form a fairly substantial base at Cologne rather than just the fact they are flying the same route and flybe doesn't want to go into direct head to head competition for the Germany -Southend passengers, who would naturally gravitate towards the airports "based" operator.

I would assume that ryanair would be able to undercut flybe till they drove them out, operating larger aircraft in the Lo-Co way they do.

Alicante has a wide enough appeal that there is enough people in the Southend area to support it and is run by easyjet who are able to more closely challenge ryanair on terms of price.

It probably makes more sense to withdraw the route now and refocus on something else, rather than fight a losing battle against Ryanair and have the route fail.

Score: 7

eurodoomed
11:02am Tue 15 Apr 14

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.eurodoomed

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

Score: 3

Nelly99
11:18am Tue 15 Apr 14

Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon!

Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon!Nelly99

Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon!

Score: 6

Almeda11
11:32am Tue 15 Apr 14

disenfranchisedpast wrote…

Almeda11 wrote…

lt is a ridiculous idea to cancel flights from Southend Airport to Cologne, on the pretext that just because Ryanair now wants to fly there from Stansted that Southend has to withdraw flights !! lt is not a valid reason at all, and completely illogical. Ryanair ALREADY has flights from Stansted to Alicante, as has Southend, but Southend has not withdrawn flights to Alicante for the same " reason" has it? The truth is there is room for both airports to offer these flights, and Stansted is almost a 2 hour journey with the Stansted Express from Southend, so obviously to people living in and around the Southend-on-Sea area, right up to Basildon/Benfleet ect this is by far the easier option, and l feel that Southend Airport is doing a great disservice to the people of Southend.

I would imagine/guess its more because Ryanair have announced they are going to form a fairly substantial base at Cologne rather than just the fact they are flying the same route and flybe doesn't want to go into direct head to head competition for the Germany -Southend passengers, who would naturally gravitate towards the airports "based" operator. I would assume that ryanair would be able to undercut flybe till they drove them out, operating larger aircraft in the Lo-Co way they do. Alicante has a wide enough appeal that there is enough people in the Southend area to support it and is run by easyjet who are able to more closely challenge ryanair on terms of price. It probably makes more sense to withdraw the route now and refocus on something else, rather than fight a losing battle against Ryanair and have the route fail.

l still think it`s a wrong decision to scrap Cologne of all places. lt is famous world wide as the Cathedral City, why not Groningen, who l`m sure most people have never even heard of!
And German Wings, another budget airline, have been operating fligts to Cologne for quite a while now, years l believe, so l think their argument is a false one.

[quote][p][bold]disenfranchisedpast[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Almeda11[/bold] wrote: lt is a ridiculous idea to cancel flights from Southend Airport to Cologne, on the pretext that just because Ryanair now wants to fly there from Stansted that Southend has to withdraw flights !! lt is not a valid reason at all, and completely illogical. Ryanair ALREADY has flights from Stansted to Alicante, as has Southend, but Southend has not withdrawn flights to Alicante for the same " reason" has it? The truth is there is room for both airports to offer these flights, and Stansted is almost a 2 hour journey with the Stansted Express from Southend, so obviously to people living in and around the Southend-on-Sea area, right up to Basildon/Benfleet ect this is by far the easier option, and l feel that Southend Airport is doing a great disservice to the people of Southend.[/p][/quote]I would imagine/guess its more because Ryanair have announced they are going to form a fairly substantial base at Cologne rather than just the fact they are flying the same route and flybe doesn't want to go into direct head to head competition for the Germany -Southend passengers, who would naturally gravitate towards the airports "based" operator. I would assume that ryanair would be able to undercut flybe till they drove them out, operating larger aircraft in the Lo-Co way they do. Alicante has a wide enough appeal that there is enough people in the Southend area to support it and is run by easyjet who are able to more closely challenge ryanair on terms of price. It probably makes more sense to withdraw the route now and refocus on something else, rather than fight a losing battle against Ryanair and have the route fail.[/p][/quote]l still think it`s a wrong decision to scrap Cologne of all places. lt is famous world wide as the Cathedral City, why not Groningen, who l`m sure most people have never even heard of!
And German Wings, another budget airline, have been operating fligts to Cologne for quite a while now, years l believe, so l think their argument is a false one.Almeda11

disenfranchisedpast wrote…

Almeda11 wrote…

lt is a ridiculous idea to cancel flights from Southend Airport to Cologne, on the pretext that just because Ryanair now wants to fly there from Stansted that Southend has to withdraw flights !! lt is not a valid reason at all, and completely illogical. Ryanair ALREADY has flights from Stansted to Alicante, as has Southend, but Southend has not withdrawn flights to Alicante for the same " reason" has it? The truth is there is room for both airports to offer these flights, and Stansted is almost a 2 hour journey with the Stansted Express from Southend, so obviously to people living in and around the Southend-on-Sea area, right up to Basildon/Benfleet ect this is by far the easier option, and l feel that Southend Airport is doing a great disservice to the people of Southend.

I would imagine/guess its more because Ryanair have announced they are going to form a fairly substantial base at Cologne rather than just the fact they are flying the same route and flybe doesn't want to go into direct head to head competition for the Germany -Southend passengers, who would naturally gravitate towards the airports "based" operator. I would assume that ryanair would be able to undercut flybe till they drove them out, operating larger aircraft in the Lo-Co way they do. Alicante has a wide enough appeal that there is enough people in the Southend area to support it and is run by easyjet who are able to more closely challenge ryanair on terms of price. It probably makes more sense to withdraw the route now and refocus on something else, rather than fight a losing battle against Ryanair and have the route fail.

l still think it`s a wrong decision to scrap Cologne of all places. lt is famous world wide as the Cathedral City, why not Groningen, who l`m sure most people have never even heard of!
And German Wings, another budget airline, have been operating fligts to Cologne for quite a while now, years l believe, so l think their argument is a false one.

Score: 2

Almeda11
11:35am Tue 15 Apr 14

Almeda11 wrote…

disenfranchisedpast wrote…

Almeda11 wrote…

lt is a ridiculous idea to cancel flights from Southend Airport to Cologne, on the pretext that just because Ryanair now wants to fly there from Stansted that Southend has to withdraw flights !! lt is not a valid reason at all, and completely illogical. Ryanair ALREADY has flights from Stansted to Alicante, as has Southend, but Southend has not withdrawn flights to Alicante for the same " reason" has it? The truth is there is room for both airports to offer these flights, and Stansted is almost a 2 hour journey with the Stansted Express from Southend, so obviously to people living in and around the Southend-on-Sea area, right up to Basildon/Benfleet ect this is by far the easier option, and l feel that Southend Airport is doing a great disservice to the people of Southend.

I would imagine/guess its more because Ryanair have announced they are going to form a fairly substantial base at Cologne rather than just the fact they are flying the same route and flybe doesn't want to go into direct head to head competition for the Germany -Southend passengers, who would naturally gravitate towards the airports "based" operator. I would assume that ryanair would be able to undercut flybe till they drove them out, operating larger aircraft in the Lo-Co way they do. Alicante has a wide enough appeal that there is enough people in the Southend area to support it and is run by easyjet who are able to more closely challenge ryanair on terms of price. It probably makes more sense to withdraw the route now and refocus on something else, rather than fight a losing battle against Ryanair and have the route fail.

l still think it`s a wrong decision to scrap Cologne of all places. lt is famous world wide as the Cathedral City, why not Groningen, who l`m sure most people have never even heard of! And German Wings, another budget airline, have been operating fligts to Cologne for quite a while now, years l believe, so l think their argument is a false one.

ps, German Wings operating from Stansted.

[quote][p][bold]Almeda11[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]disenfranchisedpast[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Almeda11[/bold] wrote: lt is a ridiculous idea to cancel flights from Southend Airport to Cologne, on the pretext that just because Ryanair now wants to fly there from Stansted that Southend has to withdraw flights !! lt is not a valid reason at all, and completely illogical. Ryanair ALREADY has flights from Stansted to Alicante, as has Southend, but Southend has not withdrawn flights to Alicante for the same " reason" has it? The truth is there is room for both airports to offer these flights, and Stansted is almost a 2 hour journey with the Stansted Express from Southend, so obviously to people living in and around the Southend-on-Sea area, right up to Basildon/Benfleet ect this is by far the easier option, and l feel that Southend Airport is doing a great disservice to the people of Southend.[/p][/quote]I would imagine/guess its more because Ryanair have announced they are going to form a fairly substantial base at Cologne rather than just the fact they are flying the same route and flybe doesn't want to go into direct head to head competition for the Germany -Southend passengers, who would naturally gravitate towards the airports "based" operator. I would assume that ryanair would be able to undercut flybe till they drove them out, operating larger aircraft in the Lo-Co way they do. Alicante has a wide enough appeal that there is enough people in the Southend area to support it and is run by easyjet who are able to more closely challenge ryanair on terms of price. It probably makes more sense to withdraw the route now and refocus on something else, rather than fight a losing battle against Ryanair and have the route fail.[/p][/quote]l still think it`s a wrong decision to scrap Cologne of all places. lt is famous world wide as the Cathedral City, why not Groningen, who l`m sure most people have never even heard of! And German Wings, another budget airline, have been operating fligts to Cologne for quite a while now, years l believe, so l think their argument is a false one.[/p][/quote]ps, German Wings operating from Stansted.Almeda11

Almeda11 wrote…

disenfranchisedpast wrote…

Almeda11 wrote…

lt is a ridiculous idea to cancel flights from Southend Airport to Cologne, on the pretext that just because Ryanair now wants to fly there from Stansted that Southend has to withdraw flights !! lt is not a valid reason at all, and completely illogical. Ryanair ALREADY has flights from Stansted to Alicante, as has Southend, but Southend has not withdrawn flights to Alicante for the same " reason" has it? The truth is there is room for both airports to offer these flights, and Stansted is almost a 2 hour journey with the Stansted Express from Southend, so obviously to people living in and around the Southend-on-Sea area, right up to Basildon/Benfleet ect this is by far the easier option, and l feel that Southend Airport is doing a great disservice to the people of Southend.

I would imagine/guess its more because Ryanair have announced they are going to form a fairly substantial base at Cologne rather than just the fact they are flying the same route and flybe doesn't want to go into direct head to head competition for the Germany -Southend passengers, who would naturally gravitate towards the airports "based" operator. I would assume that ryanair would be able to undercut flybe till they drove them out, operating larger aircraft in the Lo-Co way they do. Alicante has a wide enough appeal that there is enough people in the Southend area to support it and is run by easyjet who are able to more closely challenge ryanair on terms of price. It probably makes more sense to withdraw the route now and refocus on something else, rather than fight a losing battle against Ryanair and have the route fail.

l still think it`s a wrong decision to scrap Cologne of all places. lt is famous world wide as the Cathedral City, why not Groningen, who l`m sure most people have never even heard of! And German Wings, another budget airline, have been operating fligts to Cologne for quite a while now, years l believe, so l think their argument is a false one.

ps, German Wings operating from Stansted.

Score: 2

Almeda11
11:47am Tue 15 Apr 14

Nelly99 wrote…

Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon!

Explain please?

[quote][p][bold]Nelly99[/bold] wrote:
Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon![/p][/quote]Explain please?Almeda11

Nelly99 wrote…

Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon!

Explain please?

Score: 3

Nebs
12:00pm Tue 15 Apr 14

QuestionTime wrote…

Some of the flight times out of Southend are quite late in the day, in fact passengers don't arrive until mid evening, then by the time you get to your hotel that's the first night/day over and the return flights are early morning/midday which again leaves the passengers with no time at their destination. Even for a long weekend away you really don't get much time at your destination unless you add an extra night which then is more money for your hotel. Maybe Easy Jet and FlyBe could make their flight times more attractive for the weekend traveller and therefore maintain their routes out of Southend.

In the meantime how about Porto as a replacement destination for FlyBe or Easy Jet?

The converse is, of course, true for visitors to the UK and these are people we should be encouraging to use the service, who will come and put money into our economy rather than Brits abroad who take money out of the UK.

[quote][p][bold]QuestionTime[/bold] wrote:
Some of the flight times out of Southend are quite late in the day, in fact passengers don't arrive until mid evening, then by the time you get to your hotel that's the first night/day over and the return flights are early morning/midday which again leaves the passengers with no time at their destination. Even for a long weekend away you really don't get much time at your destination unless you add an extra night which then is more money for your hotel. Maybe Easy Jet and FlyBe could make their flight times more attractive for the weekend traveller and therefore maintain their routes out of Southend.
In the meantime how about Porto as a replacement destination for FlyBe or Easy Jet?[/p][/quote]The converse is, of course, true for visitors to the UK and these are people we should be encouraging to use the service, who will come and put money into our economy rather than Brits abroad who take money out of the UK.Nebs

QuestionTime wrote…

Some of the flight times out of Southend are quite late in the day, in fact passengers don't arrive until mid evening, then by the time you get to your hotel that's the first night/day over and the return flights are early morning/midday which again leaves the passengers with no time at their destination. Even for a long weekend away you really don't get much time at your destination unless you add an extra night which then is more money for your hotel. Maybe Easy Jet and FlyBe could make their flight times more attractive for the weekend traveller and therefore maintain their routes out of Southend.

In the meantime how about Porto as a replacement destination for FlyBe or Easy Jet?

The converse is, of course, true for visitors to the UK and these are people we should be encouraging to use the service, who will come and put money into our economy rather than Brits abroad who take money out of the UK.

Score: -2

pembury53
12:01pm Tue 15 Apr 14

eurodoomed wrote…

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure. I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

how about NASA ? why faff about with 737's, get the shuttle in there.....

[quote][p][bold]eurodoomed[/bold] wrote:
I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure. I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.[/p][/quote]how about NASA ? why faff about with 737's, get the shuttle in there.....pembury53

eurodoomed wrote…

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure. I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

how about NASA ? why faff about with 737's, get the shuttle in there.....

Score: -9

Ian P
12:39pm Tue 15 Apr 14

pembury53 wrote…

eurodoomed wrote…

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure. I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

how about NASA ? why faff about with 737's, get the shuttle in there.....

Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that a 737 can carry over 100 passengers and the shuttle only holds 4 or 5. The tickets would be too expensive and there are no stewardesses on board to serve coffee. LOL.

[quote][p][bold]pembury53[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]eurodoomed[/bold] wrote: I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure. I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.[/p][/quote]how about NASA ? why faff about with 737's, get the shuttle in there.....[/p][/quote]Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that a 737 can carry over 100 passengers and the shuttle only holds 4 or 5. The tickets would be too expensive and there are no stewardesses on board to serve coffee. LOL.Ian P

pembury53 wrote…

eurodoomed wrote…

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure. I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

how about NASA ? why faff about with 737's, get the shuttle in there.....

Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that a 737 can carry over 100 passengers and the shuttle only holds 4 or 5. The tickets would be too expensive and there are no stewardesses on board to serve coffee. LOL.

Score: 0

pembury53
12:41pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Ian P wrote…

pembury53 wrote…

eurodoomed wrote…

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure. I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

how about NASA ? why faff about with 737's, get the shuttle in there.....

Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that a 737 can carry over 100 passengers and the shuttle only holds 4 or 5. The tickets would be too expensive and there are no stewardesses on board to serve coffee. LOL.

should be a nice few complaints though..... sent up at 5 in the morning

[quote][p][bold]Ian P[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]pembury53[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]eurodoomed[/bold] wrote: I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure. I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.[/p][/quote]how about NASA ? why faff about with 737's, get the shuttle in there.....[/p][/quote]Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that a 737 can carry over 100 passengers and the shuttle only holds 4 or 5. The tickets would be too expensive and there are no stewardesses on board to serve coffee. LOL.[/p][/quote]should be a nice few complaints though..... sent up at 5 in the morningpembury53

Ian P wrote…

pembury53 wrote…

eurodoomed wrote…

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure. I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

how about NASA ? why faff about with 737's, get the shuttle in there.....

Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that a 737 can carry over 100 passengers and the shuttle only holds 4 or 5. The tickets would be too expensive and there are no stewardesses on board to serve coffee. LOL.

should be a nice few complaints though..... sent up at 5 in the morning

Score: -1

emcee
1:07pm Tue 15 Apr 14

I can understand that beggars cannot be choosers if Ryanair was the only carrier to a particular destination but surely nobody would choose to fly them if other airlines were available. This would make Flybe a more than viable carrier even if fares were double that of Ryanair. I would certainly pay more if it meant I did not have to fly on that god-awful Ryanair.

I can understand that beggars cannot be choosers if Ryanair was the only carrier to a particular destination but surely nobody would choose to fly them if other airlines were available. This would make Flybe a more than viable carrier even if fares were double that of Ryanair. I would certainly pay more if it meant I did not have to fly on that god-awful Ryanair.emcee

I can understand that beggars cannot be choosers if Ryanair was the only carrier to a particular destination but surely nobody would choose to fly them if other airlines were available. This would make Flybe a more than viable carrier even if fares were double that of Ryanair. I would certainly pay more if it meant I did not have to fly on that god-awful Ryanair.

Score: 19

Broadwaywatch
1:33pm Tue 15 Apr 14

eurodoomed wrote…

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

Which way would you consider lengthening the runway taking into account that there is a main road each end of the existing runway not to mention a certain amount of occupied dwellings? I am not sure there is now any room for manoeuvre. The old north south runway is now restricted one end by the retail park.

[quote][p][bold]eurodoomed[/bold] wrote:
I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.[/p][/quote]Which way would you consider lengthening the runway taking into account that there is a main road each end of the existing runway not to mention a certain amount of occupied dwellings? I am not sure there is now any room for manoeuvre. The old north south runway is now restricted one end by the retail park.Broadwaywatch

eurodoomed wrote…

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

Which way would you consider lengthening the runway taking into account that there is a main road each end of the existing runway not to mention a certain amount of occupied dwellings? I am not sure there is now any room for manoeuvre. The old north south runway is now restricted one end by the retail park.

Score: 3

tophat27dt
1:54pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Almeda11 wrote…

tophat27dt wrote…

A wise move to cancel that destination. Maybe Hamburg or Dusseldorf would be more successful?

Why??

I have been to Cologne. A cold soulless city but with a lovely cathedral and a long high street..good for shoppers. Dusseldorf people have a reputation for being more friendly and I love this city better; just spend a few hours on one of the static boat bars drinking German beer and watch the ships pass by is just great; the view from the revolving PO tower is memorable. Hamburg..never been there...but from Luxembourg there is bigger demand. The flights used to operate via Saarbrucken...now there is demand for direct flights. The old town and harbour area is nice. Plus its a big city; sure many locals want to visit London.

[quote][p][bold]Almeda11[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]tophat27dt[/bold] wrote:
A wise move to cancel that destination. Maybe Hamburg or Dusseldorf would be more successful?[/p][/quote]Why??[/p][/quote]I have been to Cologne. A cold soulless city but with a lovely cathedral and a long high street..good for shoppers. Dusseldorf people have a reputation for being more friendly and I love this city better; just spend a few hours on one of the static boat bars drinking German beer and watch the ships pass by is just great; the view from the revolving PO tower is memorable. Hamburg..never been there...but from Luxembourg there is bigger demand. The flights used to operate via Saarbrucken...now there is demand for direct flights. The old town and harbour area is nice. Plus its a big city; sure many locals want to visit London.tophat27dt

Almeda11 wrote…

tophat27dt wrote…

A wise move to cancel that destination. Maybe Hamburg or Dusseldorf would be more successful?

Why??

I have been to Cologne. A cold soulless city but with a lovely cathedral and a long high street..good for shoppers. Dusseldorf people have a reputation for being more friendly and I love this city better; just spend a few hours on one of the static boat bars drinking German beer and watch the ships pass by is just great; the view from the revolving PO tower is memorable. Hamburg..never been there...but from Luxembourg there is bigger demand. The flights used to operate via Saarbrucken...now there is demand for direct flights. The old town and harbour area is nice. Plus its a big city; sure many locals want to visit London.

Score: 2

Nelly99
2:24pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Almeda11 wrote…

Nelly99 wrote…

Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon!

Explain please?

Ah there is always one! If you explain a joke it isn't funny........but.
Ryanair are famous for flying to a so called destination only to find you are 100 miles away from where you wanted to be!.

[quote][p][bold]Almeda11[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nelly99[/bold] wrote: Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon![/p][/quote]Explain please?[/p][/quote]Ah there is always one! If you explain a joke it isn't funny........but.
Ryanair are famous for flying to a so called destination only to find you are 100 miles away from where you wanted to be!.Nelly99

Almeda11 wrote…

Nelly99 wrote…

Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon!

Explain please?

Ah there is always one! If you explain a joke it isn't funny........but.
Ryanair are famous for flying to a so called destination only to find you are 100 miles away from where you wanted to be!.

Score: 6

disenfranchisedpast
2:40pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Nelly99 wrote…

Almeda11 wrote…

Nelly99 wrote…

Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon!

Explain please?

Ah there is always one! If you explain a joke it isn't funny........but.
Ryanair are famous for flying to a so called destination only to find you are 100 miles away from where you wanted to be!.

Or even in a different country from your destination

[quote][p][bold]Nelly99[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Almeda11[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Nelly99[/bold] wrote: Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon![/p][/quote]Explain please?[/p][/quote]Ah there is always one! If you explain a joke it isn't funny........but.
Ryanair are famous for flying to a so called destination only to find you are 100 miles away from where you wanted to be!.[/p][/quote]Or even in a different country from your destinationdisenfranchisedpast

Nelly99 wrote…

Almeda11 wrote…

Nelly99 wrote…

Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon!

Explain please?

Ah there is always one! If you explain a joke it isn't funny........but.
Ryanair are famous for flying to a so called destination only to find you are 100 miles away from where you wanted to be!.

Or even in a different country from your destination

Score: 5

Makebelieve
4:15pm Tue 15 Apr 14

It appears Easyjet have changed strategy from local airport to the hubs now they have bought Flybe's old LGW slots and Luton poised for expansion. I think we could lose Easyjet in the next few years which will be a huge blow.

There is no need to accomodate larger aircraft, flybe operate the latest generation of Embaer aircraft which have excellent range and capacity, these aircraft also operate into City so can fly into SEN no issue. Bombardier are also busy building their C series which will be of comparbile size.

I do worry though that Southend cannot compete with the bigger airports, especially after Manston just closed.

It appears Easyjet have changed strategy from local airport to the hubs now they have bought Flybe's old LGW slots and Luton poised for expansion. I think we could lose Easyjet in the next few years which will be a huge blow.
There is no need to accomodate larger aircraft, flybe operate the latest generation of Embaer aircraft which have excellent range and capacity, these aircraft also operate into City so can fly into SEN no issue. Bombardier are also busy building their C series which will be of comparbile size.
I do worry though that Southend cannot compete with the bigger airports, especially after Manston just closed.Makebelieve

It appears Easyjet have changed strategy from local airport to the hubs now they have bought Flybe's old LGW slots and Luton poised for expansion. I think we could lose Easyjet in the next few years which will be a huge blow.

There is no need to accomodate larger aircraft, flybe operate the latest generation of Embaer aircraft which have excellent range and capacity, these aircraft also operate into City so can fly into SEN no issue. Bombardier are also busy building their C series which will be of comparbile size.

I do worry though that Southend cannot compete with the bigger airports, especially after Manston just closed.

Score: 1

Biker One
4:45pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Ryanair might claim to be flying to Cologne but in fact may be going to a regional airport far from that the passenger wanted. With EasyJet you get what you pay for, on the other hand if you fly to Paris with Ryanair you hardly get anywhere near the place and have to suffer onwards travel costs by taxis etc!. That's if it even arrives since the captains are bound to take the lowest amount of fuel or be penalised!!

Ryanair might claim to be flying to Cologne but in fact may be going to a regional airport far from that the passenger wanted. With EasyJet you get what you pay for, on the other hand if you fly to Paris with Ryanair you hardly get anywhere near the place and have to suffer onwards travel costs by taxis etc!. That's if it even arrives since the captains are bound to take the lowest amount of fuel or be penalised!!Biker One

Ryanair might claim to be flying to Cologne but in fact may be going to a regional airport far from that the passenger wanted. With EasyJet you get what you pay for, on the other hand if you fly to Paris with Ryanair you hardly get anywhere near the place and have to suffer onwards travel costs by taxis etc!. That's if it even arrives since the captains are bound to take the lowest amount of fuel or be penalised!!

Score: 4

Joe Clark
6:54pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Its saturation of the route by Ryanair, they offer more flights over the week giving people a larger pool of time to fly, the more flights on offer from single airline means they can offer them more cheaply, why would Flybe operate a route that already has a high volume of flights available, best scrap it before you start operating it and offer a different service.

Its saturation of the route by Ryanair, they offer more flights over the week giving people a larger pool of time to fly, the more flights on offer from single airline means they can offer them more cheaply, why would Flybe operate a route that already has a high volume of flights available, best scrap it before you start operating it and offer a different service.Joe Clark

Its saturation of the route by Ryanair, they offer more flights over the week giving people a larger pool of time to fly, the more flights on offer from single airline means they can offer them more cheaply, why would Flybe operate a route that already has a high volume of flights available, best scrap it before you start operating it and offer a different service.

Score: 3

Almeda11
9:13pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Nelly99 wrote…

Almeda11 wrote…

Nelly99 wrote…

Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon!

Explain please?

Ah there is always one! If you explain a joke it isn't funny........but. Ryanair are famous for flying to a so called destination only to find you are 100 miles away from where you wanted to be!.

Thanks Nelly for the explanation, l get the "gist" of it !

[quote][p][bold]Nelly99[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Almeda11[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nelly99[/bold] wrote: Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon![/p][/quote]Explain please?[/p][/quote]Ah there is always one! If you explain a joke it isn't funny........but. Ryanair are famous for flying to a so called destination only to find you are 100 miles away from where you wanted to be!.[/p][/quote]Thanks Nelly for the explanation, l get the "gist" of it !Almeda11

Nelly99 wrote…

Almeda11 wrote…

Nelly99 wrote…

Ryanair now fly to Cologne but they only take you as far as Basildon!

Explain please?

Ah there is always one! If you explain a joke it isn't funny........but. Ryanair are famous for flying to a so called destination only to find you are 100 miles away from where you wanted to be!.

Thanks Nelly for the explanation, l get the "gist" of it !

Score: 1

Campbell's dad
9:24pm Tue 15 Apr 14

eurodoomed wrote…

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

It don’t really matter how long the runway is now, to lengthen it would mean it falls into a different class of runway that would then mean they would need to widen it. This would threaten the church etc.
But the main problem the runway has is that there seems to be a weight restriction of between 62 to 66 tonnes. This is because of the construction of the runway, yes you can see the concrete & tarmac on the top surface, but the substrate is just a dry cement & compacted soil.
Not the way a proper commercial runway is constructed.
This is the reason that they cannot fly with a full plane direct to Tenerife.
Plane plus full load of passengers plus the required fuel puts it way over this limit.

[quote][p][bold]eurodoomed[/bold] wrote:
I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.[/p][/quote]It don’t really matter how long the runway is now, to lengthen it would mean it falls into a different class of runway that would then mean they would need to widen it. This would threaten the church etc.
But the main problem the runway has is that there seems to be a weight restriction of between 62 to 66 tonnes. This is because of the construction of the runway, yes you can see the concrete & tarmac on the top surface, but the substrate is just a dry cement & compacted soil.
Not the way a proper commercial runway is constructed.
This is the reason that they cannot fly with a full plane direct to Tenerife.
Plane plus full load of passengers plus the required fuel puts it way over this limit.Campbell's dad

eurodoomed wrote…

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

It don’t really matter how long the runway is now, to lengthen it would mean it falls into a different class of runway that would then mean they would need to widen it. This would threaten the church etc.
But the main problem the runway has is that there seems to be a weight restriction of between 62 to 66 tonnes. This is because of the construction of the runway, yes you can see the concrete & tarmac on the top surface, but the substrate is just a dry cement & compacted soil.
Not the way a proper commercial runway is constructed.
This is the reason that they cannot fly with a full plane direct to Tenerife.
Plane plus full load of passengers plus the required fuel puts it way over this limit.

Score: 1

disenfranchisedpast
11:44pm Tue 15 Apr 14

Campbell's dad wrote…

eurodoomed wrote…

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

It don’t really matter how long the runway is now, to lengthen it would mean it falls into a different class of runway that would then mean they would need to widen it. This would threaten the church etc.
But the main problem the runway has is that there seems to be a weight restriction of between 62 to 66 tonnes. This is because of the construction of the runway, yes you can see the concrete & tarmac on the top surface, but the substrate is just a dry cement & compacted soil.
Not the way a proper commercial runway is constructed.
This is the reason that they cannot fly with a full plane direct to Tenerife.
Plane plus full load of passengers plus the required fuel puts it way over this limit.

Actually thats not the case, the bearing strength of the runway at southend is published on the Eurocontrol website, as all runways are.

For what its worth Southends bearing strength is 39/F/B/X/T according to the publication.

39 - aircraft of a ACN (aircraft classification number) and below can use it
F - Flexible surface material (asphalt rather than rigid, like concrete)
B - Material the substrate is constructed of on a scale of A highest to D lowest, The compacted soil and cement you claimed would rate a D.
X relates to maximum tyre pressures (213PSI I think)
T is how the first number was calculated, in this case by a technical evaluation.

[quote][p][bold]Campbell's dad[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]eurodoomed[/bold] wrote:
I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.[/p][/quote]It don’t really matter how long the runway is now, to lengthen it would mean it falls into a different class of runway that would then mean they would need to widen it. This would threaten the church etc.
But the main problem the runway has is that there seems to be a weight restriction of between 62 to 66 tonnes. This is because of the construction of the runway, yes you can see the concrete & tarmac on the top surface, but the substrate is just a dry cement & compacted soil.
Not the way a proper commercial runway is constructed.
This is the reason that they cannot fly with a full plane direct to Tenerife.
Plane plus full load of passengers plus the required fuel puts it way over this limit.[/p][/quote]Actually thats not the case, the bearing strength of the runway at southend is published on the Eurocontrol website, as all runways are.
For what its worth Southends bearing strength is 39/F/B/X/T according to the publication.
39 - aircraft of a ACN (aircraft classification number) and below can use it
F - Flexible surface material (asphalt rather than rigid, like concrete)
B - Material the substrate is constructed of on a scale of A highest to D lowest, The compacted soil and cement you claimed would rate a D.
X relates to maximum tyre pressures (213PSI I think)
T is how the first number was calculated, in this case by a technical evaluation.disenfranchisedpast

Campbell's dad wrote…

eurodoomed wrote…

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

It don’t really matter how long the runway is now, to lengthen it would mean it falls into a different class of runway that would then mean they would need to widen it. This would threaten the church etc.
But the main problem the runway has is that there seems to be a weight restriction of between 62 to 66 tonnes. This is because of the construction of the runway, yes you can see the concrete & tarmac on the top surface, but the substrate is just a dry cement & compacted soil.
Not the way a proper commercial runway is constructed.
This is the reason that they cannot fly with a full plane direct to Tenerife.
Plane plus full load of passengers plus the required fuel puts it way over this limit.

Actually thats not the case, the bearing strength of the runway at southend is published on the Eurocontrol website, as all runways are.

For what its worth Southends bearing strength is 39/F/B/X/T according to the publication.

39 - aircraft of a ACN (aircraft classification number) and below can use it
F - Flexible surface material (asphalt rather than rigid, like concrete)
B - Material the substrate is constructed of on a scale of A highest to D lowest, The compacted soil and cement you claimed would rate a D.
X relates to maximum tyre pressures (213PSI I think)
T is how the first number was calculated, in this case by a technical evaluation.

Score: 4

Broadwaywatch
8:38am Wed 16 Apr 14

Campbell's dad wrote…

eurodoomed wrote…

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

It don’t really matter how long the runway is now, to lengthen it would mean it falls into a different class of runway that would then mean they would need to widen it. This would threaten the church etc.
But the main problem the runway has is that there seems to be a weight restriction of between 62 to 66 tonnes. This is because of the construction of the runway, yes you can see the concrete & tarmac on the top surface, but the substrate is just a dry cement & compacted soil.
Not the way a proper commercial runway is constructed.
This is the reason that they cannot fly with a full plane direct to Tenerife.
Plane plus full load of passengers plus the required fuel puts it way over this limit.

Which way would you consider lengthening the runway taking into account that there is a main road each end of the existing runway not to mention a certain amount of occupied dwellings? I am not sure there is now any room for manoeuvre. The old north south runway is now restricted one end by the retail park.

[quote][p][bold]Campbell's dad[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]eurodoomed[/bold] wrote:
I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.[/p][/quote]It don’t really matter how long the runway is now, to lengthen it would mean it falls into a different class of runway that would then mean they would need to widen it. This would threaten the church etc.
But the main problem the runway has is that there seems to be a weight restriction of between 62 to 66 tonnes. This is because of the construction of the runway, yes you can see the concrete & tarmac on the top surface, but the substrate is just a dry cement & compacted soil.
Not the way a proper commercial runway is constructed.
This is the reason that they cannot fly with a full plane direct to Tenerife.
Plane plus full load of passengers plus the required fuel puts it way over this limit.[/p][/quote]Which way would you consider lengthening the runway taking into account that there is a main road each end of the existing runway not to mention a certain amount of occupied dwellings? I am not sure there is now any room for manoeuvre. The old north south runway is now restricted one end by the retail park.Broadwaywatch

Campbell's dad wrote…

eurodoomed wrote…

I think at least another significant operator is needed and perhaps a charter operator or two if the airport is really to thrive. Easyjet seem to be pulling back after their recent expansion at Gatwick and Luton, and Flybe are really only fronting for Stobart Air, and are not financially secure.
I wonder whether consideration should be given to lengthening the runway to allow larger versions of Boeing 737s and Airbus 321s to use it.

It don’t really matter how long the runway is now, to lengthen it would mean it falls into a different class of runway that would then mean they would need to widen it. This would threaten the church etc.
But the main problem the runway has is that there seems to be a weight restriction of between 62 to 66 tonnes. This is because of the construction of the runway, yes you can see the concrete & tarmac on the top surface, but the substrate is just a dry cement & compacted soil.
Not the way a proper commercial runway is constructed.
This is the reason that they cannot fly with a full plane direct to Tenerife.
Plane plus full load of passengers plus the required fuel puts it way over this limit.

Which way would you consider lengthening the runway taking into account that there is a main road each end of the existing runway not to mention a certain amount of occupied dwellings? I am not sure there is now any room for manoeuvre. The old north south runway is now restricted one end by the retail park.

Score: 0

Almeda11
9:08am Wed 16 Apr 14

tophat27dt wrote…

Almeda11 wrote…

tophat27dt wrote…

A wise move to cancel that destination. Maybe Hamburg or Dusseldorf would be more successful?

Why??

I have been to Cologne. A cold soulless city but with a lovely cathedral and a long high street..good for shoppers. Dusseldorf people have a reputation for being more friendly and I love this city better; just spend a few hours on one of the static boat bars drinking German beer and watch the ships pass by is just great; the view from the revolving PO tower is memorable. Hamburg..never been there...but from Luxembourg there is bigger demand. The flights used to operate via Saarbrucken...now there is demand for direct flights. The old town and harbour area is nice. Plus its a big city; sure many locals want to visit London.

l suppose l agree with you in part. It isn`t such a pretty city as for instance Berlin, especially Charlottenburg, with its beautiful Kurfurstendamm, a wide boulevaard with trees on either side, or some other German cities, and can appear souless, but as you say has good shopping streets, in particular Schildergasse, or Hoch Str, but even here there are no trees and hardly anywhere to sit, in stark contrast to Berlin.

I would be quite happy with Dusseldorf as a replacement, it is a nice city and only a short train ride away from Cologne, and also near to places like Wuppertal, Essen, ect.

However, l hope the Ech has got it right !
Only a few weeks ago, before they actually announced the correct destinations, including Cologne, also Groningen, Munster, Caen, Rennes and Antwerp, they published a list which included Frankfurt and some other destinations, which as we now know did not materialise, Frankfurt is not among the list of the 6 recently published destinations.
Maybe this will be included in the next round of 5 extra destinations.

[quote][p][bold]tophat27dt[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Almeda11[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tophat27dt[/bold] wrote: A wise move to cancel that destination. Maybe Hamburg or Dusseldorf would be more successful?[/p][/quote]Why??[/p][/quote]I have been to Cologne. A cold soulless city but with a lovely cathedral and a long high street..good for shoppers. Dusseldorf people have a reputation for being more friendly and I love this city better; just spend a few hours on one of the static boat bars drinking German beer and watch the ships pass by is just great; the view from the revolving PO tower is memorable. Hamburg..never been there...but from Luxembourg there is bigger demand. The flights used to operate via Saarbrucken...now there is demand for direct flights. The old town and harbour area is nice. Plus its a big city; sure many locals want to visit London.[/p][/quote]l suppose l agree with you in part. It isn`t such a pretty city as for instance Berlin, especially Charlottenburg, with its beautiful Kurfurstendamm, a wide boulevaard with trees on either side, or some other German cities, and can appear souless, but as you say has good shopping streets, in particular Schildergasse, or Hoch Str, but even here there are no trees and hardly anywhere to sit, in stark contrast to Berlin.
I would be quite happy with Dusseldorf as a replacement, it is a nice city and only a short train ride away from Cologne, and also near to places like Wuppertal, Essen, ect.
However, l hope the Ech has got it right !
Only a few weeks ago, before they actually announced the correct destinations, including Cologne, also Groningen, Munster, Caen, Rennes and Antwerp, they published a list which included Frankfurt and some other destinations, which as we now know did not materialise, Frankfurt is not among the list of the 6 recently published destinations.
Maybe this will be included in the next round of 5 extra destinations.Almeda11

tophat27dt wrote…

Almeda11 wrote…

tophat27dt wrote…

A wise move to cancel that destination. Maybe Hamburg or Dusseldorf would be more successful?

Why??

I have been to Cologne. A cold soulless city but with a lovely cathedral and a long high street..good for shoppers. Dusseldorf people have a reputation for being more friendly and I love this city better; just spend a few hours on one of the static boat bars drinking German beer and watch the ships pass by is just great; the view from the revolving PO tower is memorable. Hamburg..never been there...but from Luxembourg there is bigger demand. The flights used to operate via Saarbrucken...now there is demand for direct flights. The old town and harbour area is nice. Plus its a big city; sure many locals want to visit London.

l suppose l agree with you in part. It isn`t such a pretty city as for instance Berlin, especially Charlottenburg, with its beautiful Kurfurstendamm, a wide boulevaard with trees on either side, or some other German cities, and can appear souless, but as you say has good shopping streets, in particular Schildergasse, or Hoch Str, but even here there are no trees and hardly anywhere to sit, in stark contrast to Berlin.

I would be quite happy with Dusseldorf as a replacement, it is a nice city and only a short train ride away from Cologne, and also near to places like Wuppertal, Essen, ect.

However, l hope the Ech has got it right !
Only a few weeks ago, before they actually announced the correct destinations, including Cologne, also Groningen, Munster, Caen, Rennes and Antwerp, they published a list which included Frankfurt and some other destinations, which as we now know did not materialise, Frankfurt is not among the list of the 6 recently published destinations.
Maybe this will be included in the next round of 5 extra destinations.

Score: 1

openspace
10:19am Wed 16 Apr 14

It's a shame that Cologne is no longer available but commercial pressures will always make decisions like this necessary. Having said that, I know which airline I would rather to use to fly anywhere and it certainly would not be Ryanair. Other than price, ( even then , it pays to check carefully ), Ryanair offer nothing compared to other airlines, The service is awful, baggage allowances mean, hidden costs frequent and destination airports frequently well away from the places you wish to go to even if the named destination. A truly awful airline in my opinion, I use Easyjet, BA, Flybe or Air Berlin whenever I can and find that, if travelling with luggage, these are frequently cheaper than Ryanair.
PS I have used Ryanair on a few occasions, but no longer !!!!!.

It's a shame that Cologne is no longer available but commercial pressures will always make decisions like this necessary. Having said that, I know which airline I would rather to use to fly anywhere and it certainly would not be Ryanair. Other than price, ( even then , it pays to check carefully ), Ryanair offer nothing compared to other airlines, The service is awful, baggage allowances mean, hidden costs frequent and destination airports frequently well away from the places you wish to go to even if the named destination. A truly awful airline in my opinion, I use Easyjet, BA, Flybe or Air Berlin whenever I can and find that, if travelling with luggage, these are frequently cheaper than Ryanair.
PS I have used Ryanair on a few occasions, but no longer !!!!!.openspace

It's a shame that Cologne is no longer available but commercial pressures will always make decisions like this necessary. Having said that, I know which airline I would rather to use to fly anywhere and it certainly would not be Ryanair. Other than price, ( even then , it pays to check carefully ), Ryanair offer nothing compared to other airlines, The service is awful, baggage allowances mean, hidden costs frequent and destination airports frequently well away from the places you wish to go to even if the named destination. A truly awful airline in my opinion, I use Easyjet, BA, Flybe or Air Berlin whenever I can and find that, if travelling with luggage, these are frequently cheaper than Ryanair.
PS I have used Ryanair on a few occasions, but no longer !!!!!.

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standards Organisation's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about the editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here